Renault's new Twingo will be very close to concept
As we guessed when we saw it in Paris a few months ago, the concept Twingo that Renault showed was a bit flashier than what we expect the production version to be. What we didn't guess was how little changed it might end up being. Thanks to the artist rendering from What Car? above left, we can see that the production Twingo will likely look much like the concept at right. The side skirts and wheel arches have been dropped, and the front fascia toned down a bit. It definitely loses a bit of the sportiness of the show car, but still manages to look refined and fun.
We're not sure if the cool features like the frameless door glass or panoramic roof will make the jump to the street though, and the rest of the interior features are likely to differ from the concept, as well. In the concept, four bucket seats surrounded a center console that housed docks for electronic gadgets and an auxiliary USB port. The instrument pod was center-mounted, too. The concept also showed a TV and internet-enabled car PC. One thing we're fairly confident about though is that the production Twingo will be powered by a 100-hp, 1.2-liter turbo four that should make this supermini quite zippy.
[Source: What Car?]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
D Man 4:17PM (1/04/2007)
Nice looking car, wish it would come here and replace some of the ugly Toyotas on the road.
Reply
bernie 5:21PM (1/04/2007)
Hey - doing that design took some real Ghosnads!
Reply
spots 7:49PM (1/04/2007)
I wish Nissan would import these. I'd be first in line for a basic version; it'd probably get 45-50 mpg easily.
Reply
Doug R 8:30PM (1/04/2007)
These little cars are cool but how useful are they anyway. Even if you were single and living in an apartment you can't carry squat. Which brings to question the whole sub compact idea as viable (even compact for that matter). If you can't run all your errands in one trip and you have to go home to unload and get back out again what is the point? In some cases you're putting on twice the mileage to do the same work so how much gas are you saving anyway? A 15mpg Suburban vs. a 30mpg car that carries way less than half the load or a 40 mpg compact that carries less than a third? You do the math. And forget taking the family anywhere with luggage. Not to mention extra time spent driving. How much is your time worth anyway? And how much congestion is caused by people needing to make 3 trips to get their errands done? The only exception would be straight trips to and from work or school but that is not the average soul.
What about safety? No matter how many safety devices you add it's still a tin can with wheels, not much more than a motorcycle with a windshield and doors. Combine that with being on the road twice as often and doubling your risk for an accident and you've got a serious risk. And please spare me the "we just need to get rid of SUVs and big cars" trip. So blame the folks who choose to drive safe vehicles? Does that go for the 18 wheelers too? Then goodbye to practically everything you need to buy at the store.
Time for this euphoric drug we call environmentalism to wear off and let common sense come back into the big picture.
Reply
Chris 9:07PM (1/04/2007)
Doug R, what the hell kind of stuff do you do with your car? I drive a Skyline R32 GT-R (live in Australia not America) which has pretty average cargo room and I've never had any problems with not fitting stuff in the car, and that's a 15-year-old sports car not a modern hatch.
Reply
leo 11:08AM (1/10/2007)
Doug R.
your the dumbest kid to post on the subject.
I bet you the hatch with the rear seats down will fit more stuff that most midsize sedans.
what the hell do you carry on a daily bases. I have a 4 dorr sedan and I use the rear seats once a month and my seats don't fold down adn I never really felt like I needed more space.
If I needed to get something large, like furniture or plywood (only happens once every 5-7 years) I can just rent the truck at home depot for $19.99.
As far as safety I hope the gov't works on a law that says your vehicle can not damage another more than a certain percentage, so then your Tahoe would become ILLEGAL
Reply
mike 3:23AM (1/05/2007)
To Doug R: I don't know what the NCAP safety ratings for the Twingo are, but Renault have always excelled. Far from being a "tin can on wheels". It's not sheer bulk that makes a car safe/less safe.
Reply
Doug R 3:56AM (1/05/2007)
Hit the Wal Mart, Home Depot, Sears, etc. All of which I couldn't do in one trip with a compact. Forget taking anyone with you. Now I've blown any advantage on mileage and I've spent twice the amount of time as well, sometimes more. Taking kids to the park with bicycles is totally out of the question. A bicycle rack would work but I still wouldn't want to get into any serious accident especially with kids in the car. Some folks own the family cruiser and something small and economical for when the behemoth isn't needed. That's fine although it cuts down on the flexibility.
You still have a safety issue to consider. Your skyline sounds cool but I'll bet you've never done anything more than 2 or 3 small errands and carried the wife and kids as well.
The reason we think this way is because gas is too expensive and it's not because of the oil companies. The average government collects many times what the oil companies make in profit. We think this way because we've been convinced we're destroying the planet with our cars, which we're not. We get this fuzzy warm feeling thinking we're saving the world driving these little cars. I think I've clearly demonstrated that in most practical circumstances we're not saving a drop of fuel. Just spending less time doing more important things instead of driving.
Love to come see your country someday.
Reply
Doug R 3:59AM (1/05/2007)
Technology will never overcome Physics when safety is concerned. Mass will always be the major factor no matter what else needs to be addressed. That 2lb. 2" thick door isn't going to protect you just because it has the best side impact air bag.
Reply
www.AUTITO.tk 11:53AM (1/05/2007)
First of all, the Twingo is a city car, not a supermini (check Wikipedia articles "City car" and "Supermini car"). Secondly, in Europe, South America and many other markets I ignore, hatchbacks are among the bestsellers. Of course that many superminis are offered with sedan body styles in underdeveloped countries, but these models are neverthless small and people still own them.
Most people don't carry five passengers all the time, but only two or three. If the trunk is too small, you can fold the seats (or half the bench) and use the extra space. Not everyone needs a 500 L trunk, because they aren't carrying their houses everywhere the whole time.
And about engines, well, a city car is designed for the city, as the name implies. For highways you don't need a V6 either, a 1.4 for a supermini or a 1.6 for a compact car is more than enough.
Reply
mike 1:41PM (1/05/2007)
DougR, technology does not overcome physics: it harnesses it. Air bag technology, energy-dissipating crumple zones, intelligent design of the car chassis such that potentially lethal bits of metal move down towards the road, not up through the driver. These are the improvements that make a car safe. Not sheer bulk. If a big car is not engineered safely all the energy of impact will be transmitted to the driver. The car might survive the impact but the driver won't. Whilst the driver of a safer, smaller car will walk away from the crash and live to buy another car.
Reply
Doug R 4:00PM (1/06/2007)
Safety tehcnology does not make up for mass. What you said is correct but does not negate this simple fact. I don't want to insult your intelligence mike but consider this. True story from the real world:
Years ago I drove a 1973 Chrysler Newport. I was sitting at a light when a looked in the rear view mirror in time to see (and hear) a 1982 Ford Mustang slam on it's brakes on hit me. The car barely shimmied. I certainly don't recall any feeling of whiplash mike! I pulled over and got out to witness the front end of a Ford Mustang that was totally destroyed. Drivable, but destroyed nonetheless. I proceeded to wipe 2 red paint lines (color of the stang) off my safety bumpers. The guy didn't want to report it and since I saw absolutely no damage whatsoever to my car, I agreed. "Pop your trunk just to make sure" he said. Opened just like it was new. Years later the car did receive minor damage to the front bumper. It was done by a tow truck backing into me! Don't recall any G related injuries then either mike.
Walking away from the crash and live to buy another car is precisely the point. So mike, I guess if you had to be involved in an accident between my outdated, air bagless safety tech inferior Chrysler with lap belts and a Twingo, you would choose the Twingo? In order to save the world I'm guessing? Good luck with that.
Reply
Doug R 4:02PM (1/06/2007)
So people who live in the city never need to carry anything along with 2 or 3 occupants?
Reply
Doug R 4:06PM (1/06/2007)
If anyone in South America, U.S. or where ever likes these cars good for them. It doesn't negate anything I've said. You buy a motorcycyle, you know the risks. Same goes with these micro-bubbles on wheels. Especially if it can't carry a darn thing requiring multiple trips, city or not. It certainly shouldn't be allowed to force people to drive them and it's not up to anybody to decide how big the engine should be other than the buyer.
I was at Wal Mart (you know, evil Wal Mart where most poor little folk like me shop) when a lady in a white prius was speeding through the parking lot, honking and shaking her fist at someone trying to back out. She had a "vote democrat" bumper sticker. Such poetic truth at it's zenith.
Reply
Doug R 4:27PM (1/06/2007)
Carrying their houses everywhere all the time? Now that's just stupid.
Reply
Doug R 12:45PM (1/07/2007)
I was looking at these comments I made this morning and I had a revelation. I was being a total jerk. I'm sorry guys, I still believe my points are valid but I was acting like an a hole and I apologize. Rough week last week but that's no excuse. I'm a conservative (really?) so I believe you're supposed to be responsible for one's actions. Again, sorry dudes!
Reply
spots 4:43PM (1/07/2007)
A car such as this Renault would suit 90% of my needs perfectly; for the rest, I have a truck that doesn't get used often. I drive around 35,000 miles a year- and 99% of it is interstate driving at 65-75 mph. Even if gasoline were half the price it is now, I would be interested in a car like this- I drive a 99 Chevy Metro now- the 3 cylinder that gets 45-50 mpg, and it does everything I need it to (ok, except when I want to get in a hurry! LOL)
Reply